We certainly, by definition, come from our ancestors. However, profectitious seems to be related to material inheritance. If she/he is left out of his/her parent's will then she/he is not profectitious.

By the way, if anyone wonders why I go to the trouble to write he/she or her/his, it is because I refuse to use they and them as singular pronouns but I don't want to be considered sexist.

Philip: Richard Dawkins wrote (on having his consciousness raised vis-à-vis gendered pronouns), "He or she must ask himself or herself whether his or her sense of style could ever allow himself or herself to write like this."I think that as long as one avoids "them guys" one will be forgiven for using third person plurals as third person singular neutrals in informal conversation.

Thank you for your comment Gail. I cannot do it. The English language has precious little sacrosanct grammar but to me singular pronouns cannot be replaced by plural pronouns for the sake of political correctness. To me there is nothing wrong with the use of he and his to refer to both sexes. It always has and nobody ever thought otherwise until political correctness reared its ugly head. I would not quote Richard Dawkins in any capacity and certainly not as a grammar authority.

Philip, language rules are important, yet all languages change as the world they describe changes.Except forFRENCHI suppose!

My dad had a terrible time with the concept of gender-inclusive language back in the late 70's, disgusted by "political correctness" as well. On one occasion I smiled and repeated his favorite inspirational poem, changing every he and him to she and her on the fly. I hand-waived his shock by pointing out that "everyone knows" that she means both female and male -- why, it even has he right in it! Then I asked, if he'd been raised that female is the default but could be stretched to include male when necessary, if that favorite quote would have meant as much to him. He reluctantly conceded that it wouldn't. It took a long time, but his consciousness was eventually raised. I've had to change a couple of my own assumptions -- at about the same age he grappled with gendered pronouns; his example on that continues to inspire. I'm still surprised that speech or writing which acknowledges a real-world audience should cause anyone to feel diminished or uncomfortable.

@PerryDawkins is a leading British intellectual and generally acknowledged as on of the top thinkers alive today (top 20 minimum would attract a broad consensus). He is a Professor for public understanding of science and has multiple doctorates from Oxford etc. He came into my knowledge with Unweaving the Rainbow, which answers John Keats's accusation that Isaac Newton diminished the rainbow's beauty by explaining it; Dawkins argues for the opposite conclusion. He believes that deep space, the billions of years of life's evolution, and the microscopic workings of biology and heredity contain more beauty and wonder than myths and pseudoscience. I mean, I love a good myth but I'd probably go with Kennedy 'The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.'

The greatest enemy of truth, imho, is a rigid belief that someone has it all.

The rigidity shows up in every field. Remember the steady-state vs expanding universe argument? The certainty that psychoanalysis was the only valid way (and the tendency for every new counseling theory to take that same position, even though those guys should know better.) I suspect there is an innate tendency for people to split between those defending the status quo and those more comfortable with paradox and exploration.

Dawkins is a philosophical dinosaur. He rehashes hundred-year-old arguments as if he discovered them himself. While I am not a follower of modern philosophy, I know that rational thought has by-and-large gone by the way and the avant-garde is way into subjectivism. This might be seen as the rantings of a red-neck, mesquite tree pseudo-philosopher, I am what I am. But I respect everyone’s right to an opinion.